In reading the other responses to this post I was surprised that so many seemed to be on the defensive. Perhaps they feel as if they have been accused. That is a shame.As for the idea that the post is too long or "wordy" for most to read, well, that may be true. I read the whole article and found it very useful and encouraging on many levels.

Understanding the origin of the article will lead the responder in the original direction mentioned in certain replies without personal attack or intended prejudice.

The article could have been reduced by at least half. There is a lot of repetition and I stand by my original response as to the merit of such an article posted here: which is supposed to be a "classy" forum. If there is a debate to be had wrt to forum content then it should have taken place on the forums, not camouflaged on this site. This is my humble opinion, it is made without prejudice nor reservation.

As Mike mentioned it might have been better suited in the editorial section of someone's blog.

When contributing to discussions, there is a duty on us all to treat each other with respect especially during the times of inevitable disagreement. This does not mean that there cannot be blunt, honest, open discussions but one must accept that on occasions there might be strong disagreement that bruises ones feelings. It is after all a discussion forum otherwise it would be a Blog, Twitter or merely a library.Good posting begins with good manners; good moderation begins with integrity.

This really says it all, and in spite of what some might believe, the recent thread at Bonsainut proved that people can discuss a volatile subject covering a host of subjects without resorting to inflammatory, accusatory and out and out nasty diatribe; if they choose to. I firmly believe that nastiness is a choice.

Actually it's more of a highly contagious disease. Appearantly few are immune.

I would have agreed with you up until recently when a thread dealing with religion and politics on Bnutt, the two deadly subjects, went on and on, page after page, without the kind of personal attacks we are all familiar with. This tells me one thing; if people want to they can control themselves, therefore, they have a choice and not an affliction.

I was there Vance. Did you notice though that nobody really started in on anything? If someone had really dug their heels in and let fly then it would have spread like wildfire. That's why I say it's contagious. For whatever reason people can't let things go on the internet. Hell, the superthrive thread over there is still going.

I couldn't agree with you more about bonsai forums playing to the beginner.This was why I got bored with Bonsai Talk,and did did not stick around or its demise. Frankly I don't care if it ever comes back.

I must add my voice to those who has been reading this board,and the articles here as a lurker,because I do not believe what I have to say is interesting,erudite ,and philosophical as what others like yourself have said here.As Wayne and Garth put it,I don't think I'm worthy of posting here.It does make for some pretty interesting reading though.The same can be said of Knowledge of Bonsai. Some of us are not as good at language and communication,as we are at designing and growing good bonsai.

Also it might be that there are too many bonsai forums out there,perhaps it might be a good idea to consolodate a few,like say Art of Bonsai,and Knowledge of Bonsai,or IBC,and Bonsai Nut.

Or declare that certain forums are for those of a certain level of mastery.If Bonsai Talk comes back it would be for the beginner,with a designated expert to answer questions.IBC and/or Bonsai Nut for the intermediate bonsaist,and KoB/AoB for the advanced people.

My response was an attempt to voice my opinion and my personal feelings and beliefs. Nothing more. I did not intend in any way to post a veiled attack of any kind. I apologize if I offended any one. Thank you.

I gave this some time to sink in and reflected on it for a while. I'm wondering where I would fit in to the author's scheme of things. I'm a moderator of a forum, give advice, and state my opinions on things. i never use my "power" to make myself a supreme lord of the board or anything just try to help people. I don't recall a catagory for someone like that in here (I'm not alone, I've seen many, many moderators who just donate their time to keep things running smoothly). I also wonder where the author places himself in his hiearchy. I've been around him enough to know his habits and just curious as to where he thinks he stands in this world.

Where you stand is something you need to decide, as to me, I made no claims of innocence or of guilt, I, like all others, have room for improvement. However, the subject matter is not me.

Will

Can one ever really divorce the writer of editorial material from the message itself, though? While ad hominem attacks seek to negate an opponent's views based solely on a personal (usually unrelated) point, agreeing with the author's point but calling attention to possible hypocrisy is a completely different animal.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum